[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: Re: DocBook filename extension
>From: Steffen Maier <Steffen.Maier@studserv.uni-stuttgart.de> >CC: docbook@lists.oasis-open.org >Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: Re: DocBook filename extension >Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 21:22:12 +0100 > > > I use '*.xdbk'. I don't understand why people use '*.xml', since > > it's not just XML - you can be far more specific than that. I > > regard that as somewhat like naming files containing C code as > > '*.txt', since they are technically text files (well yeah... but > > OF COURSE they're text files!). Maybe one reason I'm so keen to > > distinguish XML DocBook from other types of XML files is that I > > have pattern rules, in my makefiles, for processing them, as well > > as files of other XML-based formats. > >... >be noted in the file's suffix. That's why I like the idea of >multiple suffixes like .docbook.xml if there is need to express the >certain kind of markup language that is used inside an xml document >in the document's filename (as Jirka already pointed out it's all >inside the document's prolog anyways). Thanks to all who reminded me about DOCTYPE. As I mentioned, I'm often approaching things from a UNIXy perspective (e.g. writing pattern rules in makefiles, etc.), which usually turns out to be a *good* thing. What I still don't like about using the .xml extension is that perhaps 90% of file formats, in use, become XML-based, in the next decade. Then, so many files would have .xml extensions (assuming that convention is followed) that the extension becomes virtually meaningless. Furthermore, is many cases, a file's filename is the only piece of information you have, about it. >Specifying increasing detail from right to left through multiple >suffixes allows you to process any xml document with generic xml >processors, no matter what dtd (or not) it conforms to (even if this >is not always meaningful). This is a good point, and it's why I chose to use .xdbk.ent, for my docbook entities. Sometimes, when they're just unstructured text, I use .ent. >I think that's an important point when thinking about mime-types. >Trying to follow RFC3023, I use the following mime-type >declarations and file-suffixes (e.g. for apache): > >text/xml xml xsl xhtml >text/xml-external-parsed-entity ent >application/xml-dtd dtd mod ># application/xslt+xml xsl Hmmm... I mostly follow this (except for .xml) but I believe strongly in using .xslt, for XSLT. If I write XSLT to transform something into XSL-FO, then I'd consider using the extension .xsl. But the output would likely be .xsl-fo (though I don't regard .fo as unreasonable). > > What I'd like to know is what people use for external parsed > > entity filename conventions. I use '*.xdbk.ent', since they are > > external parsed entities that tend to be fairly specific to XML > > DocBook. > >Yep. > > For external parameter entities, I generally use '*_xdbk.dtd', > > since a DTD fragment is theoretically usable as a stand-alone > > DTD (unlike external parsed entities, which don't have to meet > > criteria as stringent as well-formed XML files), and are more > > reusable from DTDs for another vocabulary, but tend to specific > > to XML DocBook, in some way. I regard external parameter > > entities in much the same way as I view C header files - the > > extension declares the format and usage model, but not the > > usage semantics. > >Personally I use .mod for (external) parameter entities, because >I've got .mod files that might only contain entity declarations so >they don't meet the criteria of a self contained dtd IMO. Ah, but it's still valid to name them in your DOCTYPE declaration. Note that I decided NOT TO ADDRESS usage semantics in the filename extension of my external parameter entities. :) >My EUR 0.02, Eh, they should just get it over with and standardize on the electron-volt, as the basis for a global currency!! :) >Steffen. BTW, thanks for your thoughtful response! Matt _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC